I also try to avoid the J. J. Abrams Star Trek movies as the timeline reboot / destruction of Vulcan etc... wiped out everything that happen post that event in the original Kirk tv series, TNG, DS9, Voyager and the previous cinema movies with the exception of Enterprise.
How are principles involved in these examples? They're just films you don't like the look of.
The Interneship is an advert for Google. Not concerned it's about Google in particular, but that it's a huge corporation making a film about itself then shoving it in my face constantly. The rest is gravy.
Not sure how you mean incorrect. Enterprise and the events pre-vulcan destruction are one timeline and everything post destruction are another now alternative timeline to the now main J. J. Abraham timeline.
For example how can post Vulcan destruction Kirk & Spock in classic series episode Amok Time visit Vulcan later in their timeline together? The planet's not there any more!
Not sure how you mean incorrect. Enterprise and the events pre-vulcan destruction are one timeline and everything post destruction are another now alternative timeline to the now main J. J. Abraham timeline.
For example how can post Vulcan destruction Kirk & Spock in classic series episode Amok Time visit Vulcan later in their timeline together? The planet's not there any more!
The creation of a new timeline did not eradicate or write over the "original" timeline. Things will of course transpire differently in the the current movie timeline. The two (and the infinite other timelines) co-exist.
At the risk of sounding like Dave Spart, I won't watch Michael Bay films anymore because
they are jingoistic, militaristic and have a creepy attitude to women.
Hmm, let's see. I am pretty open minded and will give most things a go on dvd, although I cannot find it in me to watch the likes of (new) st trinians, spiceworld, scary movie, inbetweeners type dross (not to offend fans, I just can't watch them)
The creation of a new timeline did not eradicate or write over the "original" timeline. Things will of course transpire differently in the the current movie timeline. The two (and the infinite other timelines) co-exist.
There is only one timeline, your thinking of alternative realities.
In the new Star Trek anything post the destruction of the Kelvin is now in the new timeline effectively obliterating everything post this date from the original lore and allowing Abrams the ability to do whatever he wants with the franchise with no limitations or issues trying to fit around the original lore.
There is only one timeline, your thinking of alternative realities.
In the new Star Trek anything post the destruction of the Kelvin is now in the new timeline effectively obliterating everything post this date from the original lore and allowing Abrams the ability to do whatever he wants with the franchise with no limitations or issues trying to fit around the original lore.
You're wrong. It was explained very clearly in the movie, not to mention it was confirmed by the writers. Think of the new movie timeline/reality as another Mirror universe.
How are principles involved in these examples? They're just films you don't like the look of.
Steven Segal gives the impression of being a tosspot with a pony tail and a lot of American Rom coms have trailers that are sickly and feeble.
I have watched films with extreme violence and horror. Also films with directors and actors with questionable morals, I must have low principles then.
1) The Lord of the Rings films bored me
2) It's not a film version of the book, it's a mixture of the book, another book and some original stuff.
3) It's in two or possibly three parts when the original book is only the length of one film
4) The films are overlong for no reason in a desperate attempt to appear to be epic
5) All the hype around the films makes me have no interest in seeing the films at all.
Steven Segal gives the impression of being a tosspot with a pony tail and a lot of American Rom coms have trailers that are sickly and feeble.
I have watched films with extreme violence and horror. Also films with directors and actors with questionable morals, I must have low principles then.
All "action stars", from Arnie, to Bruce Willis to Stallone and Segal are reactionary tosspots, too. It seems you can only join the Action Club if you are a Republican.
There is only one timeline, your thinking of alternative realities.
I believe the film actually uses the term "alternate reality," to describe the change in the timeline. Hence the reason the original timeline from the beginning of TOS to the end of Voyager is now being referred to as the "prime" universe in official media.
Comments
Incorrect.
The Interneship is an advert for Google. Not concerned it's about Google in particular, but that it's a huge corporation making a film about itself then shoving it in my face constantly. The rest is gravy.
Not sure how you mean incorrect. Enterprise and the events pre-vulcan destruction are one timeline and everything post destruction are another now alternative timeline to the now main J. J. Abraham timeline.
For example how can post Vulcan destruction Kirk & Spock in classic series episode Amok Time visit Vulcan later in their timeline together? The planet's not there any more!
The creation of a new timeline did not eradicate or write over the "original" timeline. Things will of course transpire differently in the the current movie timeline. The two (and the infinite other timelines) co-exist.
they are jingoistic, militaristic and have a creepy attitude to women.
And they also stink to high heaven, of course.
meets a guy, hates him
they fall in love :yawn:
seen it.
Lol devil wears Prada, I was forced to watch it..meh!
Crikey next they'll be remaking 1984 to a pg..
Or a PG Dirty Harry where he uses the most powerful non-lethal weapon in the world.
Never going to watch that.
There is only one timeline, your thinking of alternative realities.
In the new Star Trek anything post the destruction of the Kelvin is now in the new timeline effectively obliterating everything post this date from the original lore and allowing Abrams the ability to do whatever he wants with the franchise with no limitations or issues trying to fit around the original lore.
You're wrong. It was explained very clearly in the movie, not to mention it was confirmed by the writers. Think of the new movie timeline/reality as another Mirror universe.
Steven Segal gives the impression of being a tosspot with a pony tail and a lot of American Rom coms have trailers that are sickly and feeble.
I have watched films with extreme violence and horror. Also films with directors and actors with questionable morals, I must have low principles then.
1) The Lord of the Rings films bored me
2) It's not a film version of the book, it's a mixture of the book, another book and some original stuff.
3) It's in two or possibly three parts when the original book is only the length of one film
4) The films are overlong for no reason in a desperate attempt to appear to be epic
5) All the hype around the films makes me have no interest in seeing the films at all.
All "action stars", from Arnie, to Bruce Willis to Stallone and Segal are reactionary tosspots, too. It seems you can only join the Action Club if you are a Republican.
Ditto Get Carter.
Why am I even asking? Of course they couldn't! :P
I believe the film actually uses the term "alternate reality," to describe the change in the timeline. Hence the reason the original timeline from the beginning of TOS to the end of Voyager is now being referred to as the "prime" universe in official media.